User-Centered Interface Design

1. User-Centered Interface Design Heidi P. Adkisson Senior Interactive Architect, Blink IA Seattle Graphic Artists Guild December 4, 2002

2. What is user-centered design? • First, let’s see some everyday examples of design that is NOT user-centered

3. Classic Stove Example

4. Classic Stove Example Do the controls work this way?

5. Classical Stove Example Or this way?

6. Infamous “butterfly” ballot To vote for the democrats do I punch the second hole or the third hole?

7. Are you sure you want to delete all records from the data base? Yes No “Yes” in instance is NOT a good thing www.iarchitect.com/mshame.htm “Helpful” color coding

8. Many more interesting examples http://www.iarchitect.com/mshame.htm http://www.baddesigns.com

9. What is the problem with these designs? • No designer purposes sets out to confuse or irritate users • Fallacy: the most usable design is OBVIOUS by thinking through interior thinking about the problem

10. Reference Information for Java What frame controls what window?

11. But… the target audience loved this approach • The organization was highly meaningful and powerful • It reflects how users think about the information Packages Classes

12. The lesson • Relying solely on interior thinking is a risky approach to design • It risks making incorrect assumptions about the people who will use a system !

13. User-Centered Design • Focuses on who will use a system from the very beginning • Checks in with users each step along the way A B User Research Analysis Design Iterative Design Prototyping & Testing Development

14. User Research Focusing on users from the beginning

15. User Research User Research Analysis Design Iterative Design Prototyping & Testing Development

16. User Needs Observational Studies User Interviews User Surveys Discovering User Needs Through Direct Research

17. User Needs Observational Studies User Interviews User Surveys Observational Studies • Observing how people currently perform work within their “live” context

18. Observational Studies • People aren’t able to fully articulate what they do • Behavior is often automatic • Important factors in the social and physical context are taken for granted

19. Example: Observational Study • Kitchen entertainment/information center • Physical context of use is very important • Frequent interruptions • Work occurs in a variety of locations • Cleanliness highly important

20. Example findings (user needs)Context of Use • User interface for system must be visible and controllable from a distance • Touch screen has limitations for use • Hands are frequently wet and/or dirty • Stylus must be attached to unit

21. User Needs Observational Studies UserInterviews User Surveys User Interviews • Asking users to describe how they perform work and what they think about it

22. User Interviews • Less open-ended than observational studies • Questions usually focus on getting information about particular user goals and tasks • Best conducted in the environment where users perform work

23. Example: User Interviews • Web Site targeted at software developers • How can we improve the information we provide to developers? • Questions about how they seek information

24. Example findings (user needs) • Concentrate information on fewer pages • To leverage using browser search function to find information • Provide fresh technology news daily • Very consistent pattern of proactive information seeking

25. User Needs Observational Studies UserInterviews UserSurveys User Surveys • Asking people specific questions on use and satisfaction

26. User Surveys • The Internet makes these easy and inexpensive to deploy • Good for getting specific data on existing features

27. Example: User Survey • Developer Web site • Used to get more data on specific issues identified in open-ended interviews

28. Example findings (user needs) • Optimize PDFs for on-screen use • PDF Printouts used less frequently • Replacing search engine is not a high priority • Satisfaction level with current search technology is relatively high

29. User Research: Potential Pitfalls • Methods misapplied or executed poorly • Results may point the wrong direction

30. Potential Pitfall: Just Asking People What They Want • Here’s what Homer Simpson says he wants in a car: • “I want a horn here, here, and here. You can never find a horn when you're mad. And they should all play ‘La Cucaracha’.”

31. Pitfall: Asking People What They Want • Think of the doctor analogy • People are expert in understanding what the symptoms are, but not the underlying disease or how to treat it • The user researcher must be skilled at diagnosis

32. Prototyping & Testing Checking in with users each step along the way

33. Prototyping & Testing User Research Analysis Design Iterative Design Prototyping & Testing Development

34. Early prototypes are low fidelity • They may be very exploratory designs • Mostly, paper prototypes are used • Pages may be hand-drawn or computer-drawn • Goal: Get user feedback early when changes are easy to make

35. Low Fidelity vs. Final Design

36. Usability Testing of Prototypes • Create task scenarios • Recruit participants to perform the tasks using the prototype • Use the results of testing to fix any problems • Repeat Steps 2-3

37. Conducting test sessions • Usually involves the “Think Aloud Protocol” (TAP) • User expresses thoughts out loud as they perform tasks • Clip shows testing a system in the final design stages

38. Usability Testing with Paper Prototypes • Participants “click” by pointing • They enter data by writing on the page Picture-in-picture video captures people’s actions, what the they say, and their facial expressions

39. In the TAP the facilitator must remain neutral • Key to the success of the method • Participants will look to the facilitator for reassurance • May feel like they are “failing” the test • Some participants become highly stressed • Sessions can be long and unpredictable

40. Example Session

41. How many users do you need to test? • 6-8 users • Clients are initially skeptical • But after watching the first set of sessions they believe • You start seeing the same problems again & again • Conserve your participant budget for additional rounds of testing

42. How much of the system do you test? • Some testing is always better than none • There are always time and budget trade-offs • Prioritize the most risky areas of a design • Or focus on “mission-critical” areas such as the check-out flow for e-commerce sites

43. “Discount” Usability Methods

44. Reality Bites… • The time and expertise for user-centered design may be absent on many projects • Small projects • Engineering-driven company culture • Focus on internal thinking to solve design problems • “We know what users want already”

45. Options • Conduct a heuristic evaluation • Heuristics represent user interface design best practices • Jakob Nielsen is a good starting point www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/

46. Options • Test with even one or two users • Nielsen: zero users yields zero insights http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html

47. Options • Test with internal people • They should have no involvement with the design • Get folks close to the target audience as possible • Risk of misleading information

48. Learning more about User-Centered Design and Usability

49. Some Books • The Elements of User Experience: User-Centered Design for the Web • James Jesse Garrett • User-Centered Design: An Integrated Approach • Karel Vredenburg, et al

50. A Few Web Resources • Jakob Nielsen • www.useit.com/ • Usable Web • www.usableweb.com/ • IBM - Ease of Use • www-3.ibm.com/ibm/easy/eou_ext.nsf/Publish/570